{"title":"设计随机对照试验,估算多癌检测筛查可降低的癌症死亡率。","authors":"Ping Hu, Philip C Prorok, Hormuzd A Katki","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djae247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Determining whether screening with multicancer detection (MCD) tests saves lives requires randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To inform RCT design, we estimated cancer-mortality outcomes from hypothetical MCD RCTs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used the Hu-Zelen model, previously used to plan the NLST, to estimate mortality reductions, sample-size, and power for 9 cancers for different RCT design parameters and MCD test parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our base-case RCT with 5 yearly screens and 100,000 people ages 60-74 in each arm, who also undergo standard-of-care screens, has 87-89% power to detect an 9-10% mortality reduction (NNS = 578-724) over 7-9 years. The majority of prevented deaths were from lung-cancers (base-case (64-66%) and all sensitivity analyses), 8-10% from colorectal-cancer, and 26% from the other 7-cancers, mostly from stomach/ovary/esophagus (due to excellent stage-1 survival) and less from liver/pancreas (poor stage-1 survival) or head/neck-cancer/lymphoma (excellent stage-4 survival). There was limited power for mortality reductions at most individual cancer sites. Base-case findings were sensitive to test sensitivity, stage-shifts, and mean sojourn times in the preclinical state (especially for lung-cancer), but 90% power could be recovered by recruiting a substantially higher risk population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Large-scale MCD RCTs would have 89% power to detect a ∼10% cancer-mortality reduction over a relatively short 7-9 year timeframe from trial entry. The estimated NNS for MCD RCTs compares favorably to mammographic screening. Most prevented cancer-deaths in a well-powered MCD RCT would likely be from lung-cancer. Non-lung/CRC cancer sites could be a meaningful proportion of prevented cancer-deaths but power is insufficient to isolate non-lung-cancer mortality reductions.</p>","PeriodicalId":14809,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Design of randomized controlled trials to estimate cancer-mortality reductions from multicancer detection screening.\",\"authors\":\"Ping Hu, Philip C Prorok, Hormuzd A Katki\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jnci/djae247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Determining whether screening with multicancer detection (MCD) tests saves lives requires randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To inform RCT design, we estimated cancer-mortality outcomes from hypothetical MCD RCTs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used the Hu-Zelen model, previously used to plan the NLST, to estimate mortality reductions, sample-size, and power for 9 cancers for different RCT design parameters and MCD test parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our base-case RCT with 5 yearly screens and 100,000 people ages 60-74 in each arm, who also undergo standard-of-care screens, has 87-89% power to detect an 9-10% mortality reduction (NNS = 578-724) over 7-9 years. The majority of prevented deaths were from lung-cancers (base-case (64-66%) and all sensitivity analyses), 8-10% from colorectal-cancer, and 26% from the other 7-cancers, mostly from stomach/ovary/esophagus (due to excellent stage-1 survival) and less from liver/pancreas (poor stage-1 survival) or head/neck-cancer/lymphoma (excellent stage-4 survival). There was limited power for mortality reductions at most individual cancer sites. Base-case findings were sensitive to test sensitivity, stage-shifts, and mean sojourn times in the preclinical state (especially for lung-cancer), but 90% power could be recovered by recruiting a substantially higher risk population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Large-scale MCD RCTs would have 89% power to detect a ∼10% cancer-mortality reduction over a relatively short 7-9 year timeframe from trial entry. The estimated NNS for MCD RCTs compares favorably to mammographic screening. Most prevented cancer-deaths in a well-powered MCD RCT would likely be from lung-cancer. Non-lung/CRC cancer sites could be a meaningful proportion of prevented cancer-deaths but power is insufficient to isolate non-lung-cancer mortality reductions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae247\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae247","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Design of randomized controlled trials to estimate cancer-mortality reductions from multicancer detection screening.
Background: Determining whether screening with multicancer detection (MCD) tests saves lives requires randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To inform RCT design, we estimated cancer-mortality outcomes from hypothetical MCD RCTs.
Methods: We used the Hu-Zelen model, previously used to plan the NLST, to estimate mortality reductions, sample-size, and power for 9 cancers for different RCT design parameters and MCD test parameters.
Results: Our base-case RCT with 5 yearly screens and 100,000 people ages 60-74 in each arm, who also undergo standard-of-care screens, has 87-89% power to detect an 9-10% mortality reduction (NNS = 578-724) over 7-9 years. The majority of prevented deaths were from lung-cancers (base-case (64-66%) and all sensitivity analyses), 8-10% from colorectal-cancer, and 26% from the other 7-cancers, mostly from stomach/ovary/esophagus (due to excellent stage-1 survival) and less from liver/pancreas (poor stage-1 survival) or head/neck-cancer/lymphoma (excellent stage-4 survival). There was limited power for mortality reductions at most individual cancer sites. Base-case findings were sensitive to test sensitivity, stage-shifts, and mean sojourn times in the preclinical state (especially for lung-cancer), but 90% power could be recovered by recruiting a substantially higher risk population.
Conclusions: Large-scale MCD RCTs would have 89% power to detect a ∼10% cancer-mortality reduction over a relatively short 7-9 year timeframe from trial entry. The estimated NNS for MCD RCTs compares favorably to mammographic screening. Most prevented cancer-deaths in a well-powered MCD RCT would likely be from lung-cancer. Non-lung/CRC cancer sites could be a meaningful proportion of prevented cancer-deaths but power is insufficient to isolate non-lung-cancer mortality reductions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the National Cancer Institute is a reputable publication that undergoes a peer-review process. It is available in both print (ISSN: 0027-8874) and online (ISSN: 1460-2105) formats, with 12 issues released annually. The journal's primary aim is to disseminate innovative and important discoveries in the field of cancer research, with specific emphasis on clinical, epidemiologic, behavioral, and health outcomes studies. Authors are encouraged to submit reviews, minireviews, and commentaries. The journal ensures that submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous and expedited review to publish scientifically and medically significant findings in a timely manner.